Climate change is today one of the most pressing concerns. This situation cannot be left unchecked, and as environmental analyst Lester Brown has emphatically stressed, “If we continue with business as usual, civilisational collapse is no longer a matter of whether but when” [1]. The recent United Nations (UN) Report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is both alarming and challenging [2]. The Report categorically states: “Warming of the climate system is unequivocal… The atmosphere and ocean have warmed, the amounts of snow and ice have diminished, sea level has risen, and the concentrations of greenhouse gases have increased” [2]. As reported in the media, the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon has declared, “The heat is on… Now we must act” [3].

On the global level, we must urgently eliminate and disconnect the causal relationship between extreme poverty and unsupportable rapid population growth, notably in the low income countries. In recent decades, both objectives have been achieved particularly in East Asia. However, progress has been modest with the situation worsening in some countries and regions. Lester Brown has warned of the urgency to slow the population growth rate and to achieve stabilisation of the global population soon in order to avoid the impending disastrous food and water crisis [4]. Jomo Kwame Sundaram, an economist in the United Nations, strongly argues that this “…affirm(s) the need for a shift away from the fundamentalist free-market thinking that has dominated poverty-reduction strategies in recent decades towards context-sensitive measures to promote sustainable development and equality” [5]. Environmental pollution—i.e. air and water—is now critical in many non-West countries and requires urgent action. It requires firm commitments and it will take time. London’s Great Smog of 1952 killed thousands and took more than a decade to clear [6].

To achieve global sustainability, we need a global mental change as an essential imperative condition to prevent the disastrous and irreversible deterioration in climate conditions. Sustainability is a concept for an age of hypercomplexity, continuous rapid changes and indeterminate conditions of interconnected global and local ecological, cultural and social crises. Sustainability requires complex in-depth and multifaceted corrective processes in order to redress the broad range of unsustainability, including its ethical and value-loaded cultural dimensions. An equally important point to note, sustainability is multidisciplinary. It is imperative to acknowledge architecture academic Leon van Schaik’s analysis in the restructuring of our embedded mental relationship between centre and periphery [7], and to recognise well-known sociologist Saskia Sassen’s exposition in promoting the primacy of our historical roots beyond the artificial unstable impact of neoliberal generated global substances [8]. Furthermore, sustainability must be enriched by the visions and serendipitous contribution of art, design and culture. It needs to also provide inspiring guidelines to generate sustainable vibrancy for the benefit and enjoyment of everyone.

In the last two decades, with rapid growth in its banking and commercial sectors, Singapore has strong ambitions to become a major global city. The two Integrated Resorts, annual downtown Formula 1 event, sophisticated entertainment and restaurant venues, as well as luxury brand shops in upgraded shopping malls, have collectively led to an unsustainable global theme park type of vibrancy. Furthermore, this has increasingly provoked a clear division of the city, with vibrancy firmly based on income and affordability. In response to global and local challenges, Singapore needs to develop and enhance urgently a sustainable, affordable and accessible vibrancy for all Singaporeans.

Presently, the city-state is deeply embedded in Modernity’s dominant modes of understanding reality, with economic and technical systems narrowly defining the logical linear orientated rationality. There is now a greater awareness that change, indeterminacy and uncertainty are the dominant features of our contemporary life [9]. In recent years, civil societies and activists have posed increasingly effective challenges. Furthermore, the pace of new technologies and innovation on a broad front is developing rapidly. This has generated the need for political change to happen much faster than before. It requires us to question many presently unchallengeable official conceptual guidelines, and to debate issues such as meritocracy and projected population growth, as well as the use of sovereign wealth funds for the welfare and services to the community. Government policies that refuse to face up to the current reality of unsustainability, while continuing to emphasise the ideals and development strategies of the past, are doomed to fail. However, to transform them quickly is not an easy task and cannot be quickly achieved.

Achieving sustainability in Singapore is therefore an ambitious target. This will take time, radical readjustments, political commitment and broad-based support of the whole community. A deeper broad-based slower transformational process is a clear option. However, it must not become an exercise of tokenism which will quickly result in disenchantment. To put this framework for change in perspective: “The past is owned by those who know. The present is controlled by those who think. The future belongs to those who can imagine (or dream)” [10].

It is in this context that I will like to share my observations on Singapore—first, selected challenges of sustainability in relation to (a) a sustainable population, (b) “fewer cars, fewer roads”, (c) Third Space and (d) the dynamic serendipity of the arts; and second, examples of development strategies towards a people-oriented sustainable environmental vibrancy.

1 Challenges of Sustainability

1.1 A Sustainable Population

Singapore’s White Paper published in January 2013 outlined a comprehensive projection up to the year 2030 [11]. It identified two current fault lines: i.e. the long-term impact of low birthrates and the subsequent excessive dependency on senior citizens. The Paper received many critical responses, particularly in relation to the large income gap and low wages. However, the projected increase in population to 6.9 million is the focus of much public controversy. Former Nominated MP and Nature Society President Geh Min’s impassioned plea in her article entitled Singapore: Home or Hotel? has echoed the reality of Singapore. She stated that “Without a shared sense of home, we will not achieve social cohesion in our compact city-state… Let us not deteriorate into a city-state of convenience: a hotel rather than a home” [12]. This concern has since escalated to a much wider range of issues, and has generated positive policy response to protect the jobs and identity of Singaporeans.

Two significant population issues stand out. First: According to Alex Au’s insightful blog post entitled Population: Elemental Considerations 1, a demographically sustainable population in Singapore similar to other developed economies will have a dependent ratio of about 2.25 [13]. Alex, a civil society activist, also warned that a short term solution with substantial increase of new citizens will have dire consequences decades later, when these citizens become seniors requiring support. Fortunately, the dependent ratio can be favourably adjusted presently, as there are large numbers of foreign workers not eligible to retire in Singapore. Second: Sociology scholar Shirley Sun in her new book analyses the reasons why Singapore has a very low fertility rate which is well below the replacement level of 2.1 [14]. As detailed in a book review, Sun argues that the cultural-ideological gaps in Singapore between the individual and the State have led to chronic popular dissatisfaction [15]. All responsibility in Singapore has been shifted to the family in the near absence of seriously redistributive and socialised welfare services. This has given rise to the failure of increasing Singapore’s fertility rate even after a long period of government childbirth incentive policies.

Even with the comprehensive inclusive corrective measures taken to improve the birth rate, it will take time before results are seen. Presently a moderate input of new citizens to make up for the birth rate shortfall will correct this imbalance, and will achieve the long-term objective of a sustainable population.

1.2 “Fewer Cars, Fewer Roads”

This is the title of prominent local academic Kishore Mahbubani’s dream in a recent article published in the mass media [16]. Is it real—is it realisable? Dreaming has been described as “having visions beyond what is usually considered possible” [17]. Kishore states: “The problem here is that a car remains an essential part of the Singapore dream. Yet, if every Singaporean achieves his or her dream, we will get a national nightmare” [16]. In my opinion, to realise the dream requires many inter-related complex challenges. We urgently need to expand and improve our public transport facilities. However, the extension of the MRT lines will take time. Our immediate implementable task is to actively promote cycling for commuting, as an efficient and affordable mode of transport. According to a Straits Times report: “A cycling census in London this year found that one in four road users in the morning peak period is a cyclist. For some popular roads, as many as three in five vehicles in the morning rush hour were bikes” [18]. Our roads must provide bicycle lanes, as we need to strive towards an effective national network which is green, efficient, affordable and safe for Singaporeans in all age groups. Singapore can aspire to become a self-respecting, cycling-oriented sustainable modern city. Values and lifestyles must change to achieve sustainability, toward a richer job and work satisfaction and greater happiness. In the process, the single-minded pursuit of wealth and status of car ownership can be successfully contested.

The article has drawn attention to the danger when a single agency makes decisions, resulting in the unnecessary demolition of the much beloved National Library at Stamford Road. Kishore lamented: “The road planners who designed this tunnel had no idea that they were effectively shooting a bullet through the soul of Singapore by destroying the National Library” [16].

We are currently confronted with the decision by this same agency to construct a highway across Bukit Brown. Can this action be changed or await further analysis in the projection of economic and population growth? It is interesting to note that this article received little public and media attention. Perhaps, dreaming has yet to attract much interest for Singaporeans?

1.3 The Third Space

Singapore’s policy of meritocracy has developed since independence from our overemphasis on scholastic achievement. Top scholars are nurtured through generous scholarships and handpicked for top government jobs. It has in recent years received increasing public criticism of its elitism. At the same time the authorities are now more aware of the need to redefine their scope and selection process in order to meet the rapid challenging global conditions. It is now clear that the selection process must be broadened, and must include the arts and creative cultures, as well as the sciences and sports. Furthermore, meritocracy particularly in the public service can only be justified when it is exercised with firmly committed individual social responsibility.

In a recent interview, Kwok Kian Woon, a noted social science academic, has strongly stressed that we need a Singapore Third Space which “must not be swayed or enticed by power or money; it must steer clear of politics, especially partisan politics and market forces” [19]. Third Space has now provided an effective platform for civil societies and activists with constant critical voices through social media such as Alex Au’s Yawning Bread blog and The Online Citizen, as well as other independent websites and publications. A wide range of issues are raised. They include areas covering social and spatial justice, minimum wage, education, housing, healthcare, gay rights and gender equality among others. I will give two examples:

  1. 1.

    Bukit Brown is an important environmental site with irreplaceable collective memories. The Singapore Heritage Society (SHS) has worked hard over recent years to change the authority’s mindset in constructing a major highway across the site and to develop it for low rise private housing [20]. The Society has since received strong support from the World Monuments Fund as it has listed Bukit Brown on its 2014 World Monuments Watch list. However, to date no policy change has been made yet.

  2. 2.

    Economist Donald Low’s recent article entitled “Has ‘global city’ vision reached its end date?” has presented many key questions which policy makers must confront and resolve [21]. “Global city” concepts and characteristics of income inequality, spatial and social injustice as well as unsustainable theme park-like development have now been brutally exposed. He concludes “It is becoming clear that economic growth no longer creates the inclusive and just society that Singaporeans seek.”

1.4 The Dynamic Serendipity of the Arts

In this age of rapid change, uncertainty and complexity, the creative art and design communities recognise their development can no longer be regulated in a fashion that is linear and inevitably Eurocentric. However, in Singapore, there is almost no fundamental mindset change yet in many institutionalised structures of power. We must contest the self-centred Modernist tradition of art as an autonomous object. Unlike politics, art begins in curiosity and proceeds as an instrument for questioning the existing order of things and as a platform for imagining alternatives. It is not bound by constraints of rational calculation and pure logic, instead requiring the challenges of tension and disruptive novelty. An example is The Locust Wrath, a dance project by The Arts Fission Company led by Angela Liong. The Locust Wrath was a performance strongly inspired by ecological and climate change, supported by an imaginative electro-acoustic soundscape [22]. As Nikos Papastergiadis, a cultural studies academic, has commented: “Artists have developed techniques for finding the questions with which they can cross-examine the perplexity of our common condition” [23]. Local playwright Alfian Sa’at was inspired by and responded to the overwhelming public reaction ignited by the government’s Population White Paper to write the play titled Cook a Pot of Curry [24]. The play was based on a number of candid interviews, with critics reviewing: “Watch it if you dare… Because it wastes absolutely no time plunging right into the depths of Singapore’s population tensions, digging up old scars, touchy topics and virtually slapping your face with them” [24]. Art is not concerned whether it appears to be useless or functional. Its creation has become increasingly both local and global. Singapore based Theatreworks’ recent publication entitled From Identity to Mondialisation is a must read to understand its incredible ground breaking journey of 25 years [25]. Theatreworks’ artistic director Ong Keng Sen has taken the risk of negotiating differences through exchanges with traditional and contemporary artists, and has successfully promoted and established a cosmopolitan dialogue between different people that can relate to the essence of local experience and the global process. Art requires a commitment towards openness and appreciation that differences really matter. Art is a vital independent creative force of visions, imagination and dreams. Art can generate unexpected and unintentional contributions to the immense challenges towards sustainability. In conclusion, Ivan Heng—the Founding Artistic Director of W!LD RICE and a recent recipient of the Cultural Medallion—has aptly stated: “I would like to create a safe and free platform where the most challenging and urgent issues of the day can be debated and discussed without fear or favour” [26].

2 Strategies Towards a People-Oriented Sustainable Environmental Vibrancy

Here I present five examples of development strategies and concepts toward an active people-oriented sustainable environmental vibrancy that may be applied in Singapore. Each of the ideas will require further in-depth studies and testing for their suitability. Some concepts, with modification, can also be applied in many other major cities in Asia’s emerging economies. The examples are:

  1. 1.

    A “no car” development option

  2. 2.

    New public space for citizens

  3. 3.

    Public space in shopping malls

  4. 4.

    New uses for existing roads

  5. 5.

    Shifting density and new streetscapes

2.1 A “No Car” Development Option

Presently 63 % of the population in Singapore go to work by public transport [27]. This compares unfavourably with 90 % in Hong Kong [28]. With increased demand in the future, construction of more roads cannot be the solution. Singapore needs to improve its public transport and provide a comprehensive cycling network in order to reduce the pressure of driving to work. Car ownership as a symbol of success particularly for the upward aspiring professional and middle income Singaporean must be corrected, but this will take time. It is in this context that we should examine a concept of how we can induce some Singaporeans to opt for a “no car” option.

The “no car” option will mean that no car parking facilities will be provided in selected public and private housing projects. These projects should ideally be located in close proximity to MRT stations and convenient downtown locations. Residential density can be substantially increased in response to the expanded capacity of the MRT system, without adding to road congestion. The HDB should rent single room units in downtown areas to Singaporean workers at an affordable cost. Workers in the service industries working late hours will find this option particularly appealing. It will also make urban living attractive to the higher income individuals in response to their preferred lifestyles. Furthermore, this can stimulate more varied and vibrant activities that cater to everyone, along existing minor roads after dark, in downtown Singapore.

2.2 New Public Space for Citizens

Since 1980, many emerging economies have grown at a historically unprecedented pace. Their cities are now more spatially fragmented, more socially divisive and more restrictive for the poor in the use of available public space. To achieve sustainability and social equity we need to maximise the provision and accessibility of public space and lower the barriers for interaction, enabling the citizens to choose where, when, how and with whom to interact.

To elaborate, three examples in Singapore are raised:

  1. 1.

    Bukit Brown needs to be preserved as a special historical public park of our collective memory. To realise a dream like Kishore’s—to have fewer cars—why do we still need to build a new highway across the site? Furthermore, even if the provision of middle income housing is necessary, we should instead consider building a few high rise blocks and to leave the present exciting, chaotic and memorable landscape largely untouched.

  2. 2.

    Singapore has more than 20 golf courses. Some of these courses should be converted into much needed public parks and community facilities. To meet the stated quantum of use, high rise construction around the sites will be an attractive alternative solution.

  3. 3.

    There are many locations across expressways which are imminently suitable to construct a second level platform linking two active developed areas. The size and shape of the platform will vary to fit in the landscape of the location, and should be used for the arts and community activities. It will be a place to meet, relax and exercise, as well as to participate collectively and to celebrate festivals and other joyous events together.

2.3 Public Space in Shopping Malls

The shopping mall is among the most striking urban forms in the city centres of emerging economies. It is generated by the competition to attract foreign investments as well as local and global cosmopolitan elites. The developer’s ambition to maximise profit has been allowed to become the paramount objective, disregarding any aspirations of achieving public goodwill through provision of public space. The design of malls became inclined towards limitedly serving its commercial purpose. Many areas in malls that were once public and accessible to all in the urban centres have been and still are being taken up for private usage. Today in Singapore, facilities for artistic performances and non-governmental public gathering for discourse and celebrations are clearly inadequate. They are expensive and hardly affordable particularly for the less-established experimental arts and community groups.

The mall exists in an interesting grey area: its space is opened to the public to attract trading, despite its private ownership. The key issue is how to ensure that the mall will provide a reasonable quantum of affordable public space, and how measures are taken to guarantee that it will be provided. We need to establish progressive planning codes for shopping malls specifically relevant to each city, in order to ensure the effective provision of open and non-commercial public space including spaces for art performances, exhibitions, public discourse, public libraries, non-profit design and art offices and bookshops, etc. The challenge now is for public space to be incorporated into the design of the mall with minimum rental charged to cover maintenance for the amenities.

2.4 New Uses for Existing Roads

Singapore, like many other traditional Asian cities, has streets that are bustling with life after dark. Besides serving their functions, back lanes were often occupied as community spaces. However, with the advent of rapid modernisation and urban development, street activities suffered a heavy toll from disruptions that destroyed their vibrancy. Motor vehicles have taken possession of the streets. Singaporeans are now increasingly aware that an inclusive society must include spatial justice such as the use of public space as a citizen’s right. The near complete dominance by motor vehicles of existing roads must therefore be on the contesting agenda.

To introduce bottom-up arts and community activities on public roads during weekends and public holidays, with governmental support at arm’s length, will be a big challenge. Outside downtown and major commercial areas, there is another level where local residents and cultural groups can wish to repossess particular streets for their special events and celebrations as well as other art-related and community activities. However, there are other obstacles to overcome. They include the acceptance of non-government, independent organisers and coordinators, together with payment to cover expenses as well as selecting the dates and level of activities. To start off, it may be advisable to select dates when businesses along major roads are not seriously affected, such as Christmas Day, Chinese New Year and National Day.

2.5 Shifting Density and New Streetscapes

The Singapore Master Plan is revised, amended and expanded every five years. In response to numerous inter-related factors, in particular the increased capacity of public transport and roads, residential density and plot ratio will be adjusted accordingly. The upward adjustment is regulated and applied to existing demarcated planning areas. Substantial increase in the last decade has led to the demolition of historical buildings as well as many sound buildings constructed in recent years. This has resulted in a homogeneous urbanscape without the much needed different historical anchorage in each location.

The theory of shifting density is to enable others to purchase and transfer the increased residential density or plot ratio from adjoining preserved buildings with a regulated payment, for upgrading as well as improving the efficiency of electrical consumption. Broadly, this is applicable to are three different areas. First, this applies along main roads, such as Beach Road. This will provide the necessary incentive for the owners of Golden Mile Complex—a historically important building—to benefit from this exercise. Second, this applies to surrounding areas of MRT stations. Many owners may take advantage of this exercise. The areas will have a complex hierarchy and a mixed development appearance that is chaotic, exciting and indeterminate. Third, this applies to a large area scheduled for redevelopment such as Queenstown. With the present planning approach, the authority has rejected the residents’ wish to preserve many buildings and sites. However, by applying this tactic of shifting density it is conceivable that much can be preserved. Existing roads can be upgraded but not necessarily widened. The whole sector can be a testing ground to achieve a cycling friendly sustainable environment. Car usage should be limited. Minor roads can be enhanced for roadside and community activities. It can become a new chapter for urban redevelopment in Singapore and elsewhere in the Asian region.

3 Conclusion

Reaching sustainability in Singapore is an ambitious target. It will take time and radical readjustments to our values and lifestyles as well as the support of the whole community. The recent Draft Master Plan 2013 has shown some positive improvement in many areas, such as cycling networks, open public spaces and historical preservation. However, the paramount challenges for Singapore today are to work committedly towards achieving a people oriented inclusiveness and a sustainable, creative and vibrant society. I wish to end by quoting a review of my recent book: “Maybe in a few years’ time, the unfolding picture will be clearer. It is a future we cannot easily foresee but I suspect that it is a choice of a future that many will have to make soon” [29].